Current approaches for research of multiple sclerosis biomarkers

Автор(и)

  • T Kolyada Mechnikov Institute of Microbiology and Immunology,
  • A Zelenskaya Mechnikov Institute of Microbiology and Immunology,
  • O Tupotilov Mechnikov Institute of Microbiology and Immunology,

Ключові слова:

multiple sclerosis, biological markers, mononuclear phagocytes, genomics, proteomics, metabolomics

Анотація

Current data concerning features of multiple sclerosis (MS) etiology, pathogenesis, clinical course and treatment of disease indicate the necessity of personalized approach to the management of MS patients. These features are the variety of possible etiological factors and mechanisms that trigger the development of MS, different courses of disease, and significant differences in treatment efficiency. Phenotypic and pathogenetic heterogeneity of MS requires, on the one hand, the stratification of patients into groups with different treatment depending on a number of criteria including genetic characteristics, disease course, stage of the pathological process, and forms of the disease. On the other hand, it requires the use of modern methods for assessment of individual  risk of developing MS, its early diagnosis, evaluation and prognosis of the disease course and the treatment efficiency. This approach is based on the identification and determination of biomarkers of MS including the use of systems biology technology platforms such as genomics, proteomics, metabolomics and bioinformatics. Research and practical use of biomarkers of MS in clinical and laboratory practice requires the use of a wide range of modern medical and biological, mathematical and physicochemical methods. The group of "classical" methods used to study MS biomarkers includes physicochemical and immunological methods aimed at the selection and identification of single molecular biomarkers, as well as methods of molecular genetic analysis. This group of methods includes ELISA, western blotting, isoelectric focusing, immunohistochemical methods, flow cytometry, spectrophotometric and nephelometric methods. These techniques make it possible to carry out both qualitative and quantitative assay of molecular biomarkers. The group of "classical methods" can also include methods based on polymerase chain reaction (including multiplex and allele-specific PCR) and genome sequencing techniques (including full genome resequencing, targeted resequencing of the genome). The results obtained with these techniques became the basis for the further development of screening technologies. Disadvantages of the "classical" methods are associated not only with their resolution or other technical limitations but also to the fact that the range of pathological processes in MS may vary significantly from patient to patient and single biomarkers suitable for one group of patients may be inappropriate for another group of patients. Due to the complexity of MS the reflection of pathological changes may be determined not by single biomarkers but by isolated biomarkers panel from different compartments. The solution of this problem seems to be possible due to the development of microarray methods including biochips technology. Biochips are used for screening of MS patients and allow determining the rare MS-associated gene variants that have a significant impact on the development of the disease. In conjunction with the "classical" methods, microarrays allowed to apply systems biology approaches (i.e. genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, epigenomics) in the study of MS biomarkers. Addition of bioinformatics methods to "classical" and microarray laboratory methods allows not only to find new biomarkers but to identify complex patterns of biomarkers while single biomarkers informative value is not sufficient. To date, the use of genome-wide association study (GWAS) revealed more than a hundred genetic variants associated with the development of MS, while the total number of investigated genetic variants including the candidate ones exceeded two hundred. GWAS is used to identify correlations of genetic variants with the disease, including the identification of variants associated with a risk of developing MS, but cannot answer the question of the causal links between specific genes polymorphism and the pathogenesis of MS. Current studies of biomarkers of disease severity, progression, pathogenetic type and treatment efficacy are based on transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics technologies. Transcriptomics includes genome-wide research of RNA sequences based on the results obtained with comparative genomic hybridization on biochips, massive parallel RNA sequencing, and measuring the amount of mRNA by real-time PCR. This technology is actively used in studies of gene expression profile of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from MS patients aimed at identifying molecular markers of disease status suitable for clinical use. Proteomics is a large-scale expression and protein distribution studies in patients with MS based on the results obtained via microarray and mass spectrometry, liquid and gas chromatography methods. In recent years, a growing number of MS proteomic studies using 2DE-MS method (two-dimensional electrophoresis coupled with mass spectrometry). Metabolomics studies of low-molecular-weight metabolic profiles based on the results obtained by mass spectrometry, liquid and gas chromatography, nuclear magnetic resonance. However, unlike other «-omics»-technologies, in metabolomics microarray-techniques are not used. Conclusion. Search, verification and clinical application of biomarkers for multiple sclerosis are one of the most challenging medical and biological problems. Its solution requires an interdisciplinary approach, organization of large-scale research and engagement of new research methods. In recent years, a significant amount of data received allowed to reveal hundreds of candidate biomarkers. Some of these biomarkers have significant potential for the monitoring of disease activity and assessment of therapy efficiency. However, the verification is required for a widespread clinical application; it implies further large-scale studies in different countries. The development of personalized medicine in Ukraine, the application of its principles to the management of multiple sclerosis patients, along with the use of advanced "classic" biomarker research methods requires the introduction of modern methods including the use of new-generation biochips, genomics technologies, proteomics and metabolomics.

Посилання

Goodin DS. (Ed.) Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, Volume 122 (Handbook of Clinical Neurology). Elsevier Science. 2014. 736 p.

Chernenko MY, Vovk VI. Current approaches to pathogenetic therapy of multiple sclerosis // International medical journal. 2015. N 1. P. 58-62.

Katsavos S, Anagnostouli M. Biomarkers in Multiple Sclerosis: An Up-to-Date Overview // Multiple Sclerosis International. 2013. Vol. 2013 (2013). URL: http://www.hindawi.com/journals/msi/2013/340508/ (request date 18.09.2016)

D’Ambrosio A, Pontecorvo S, Colasanti T. [et al.] Peripheral blood biomarkers in multiple sclerosis // Autoimmunity reviews. 2015. Vol. 14. N 12. P. 1097-1110. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568997215001639 (request date 10.08.2016)

Paap BK, Hecker M, Koczan D, Zettl UK. Molecular biomarkers of multiple sclerosis // J. Clin. Cell. Immunol. 2013. S. 10:009. URL: http://www.omicsonline.org/molecular-biomarkers-in-multiple-sclerosis-2155-9899.S10-009.php?aid=11679 (request date 12.09.2016)

Schmitz G, Leuthäuser-Jaschinski K, Orsó E. Are Circulating Monocytes as Microglia Orthologues Appropriate Biomarker Targets for Neuronal Diseases? // Cent. Nerv. Syst. Agents in Med. Chem. 2009. Vol. 9. P. 307-330.

Harris VK, Sadiq SA. Disease Biomarkers in multiple sclerosis: potential for use in therapeutic decision making // Molecular Diagnosis and Therapy. 2009. Vol. 13. N 4. P. 225-244.

Kuhle J, Plattner K, Bestwick JP. [et al.] A comparative study of CSF neurofilament light and heavy chain protein in MS // Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2013. Vol. 19. P. 1597-1603.

Teunissen CE, Khalil M. Neurofilaments as biomarkers in multiple sclerosis // Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2012. Vol. 18. N 5. P. 552–556.

Lutterotti A, Berger T, Reindl M. Biological markers of multiple sclerosis // Current Medical Chemistry. 2007. Vol. 14. P. 1956-1965.

Bielekova B, Martin R. Development of biomarkers in multiple sclerosis // Brain. 2004. Vol. 127. P. 1463-1478.

Alvermann S, Hennig C, Stüve O. [et al.] Immunophenotyping of cerebrospinal fluid cells in multiple sclerosis: in search of biomarkers // JAMA Neurol. 2014. Vol. 71. P. 905-912.

Housley WJ, Pitt D, Hafler DA. Biomarkers in multiple sclerosis // Clinical Immunology. 2015. Vol. 161. N 1. P. 51-58.

Johnson AD, O'Donnell CJ. An Open Access Database of Genome-wide Association Results // BMC Medical Genetics. 2009. Vol. 10. N 1. URL: http://bmcmedgenet.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2350-10-6 (request date 05.07.2016)

International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium (IMSGC), Beecham AH, Patsopoulos NA. [et al.] Analysis of immune-related loci identifies 48 new susceptibility variants for multiple sclerosis // Nature Genetics. 2013. Vol. 45(11). P. 1353–1360. URL: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v45/n11/full/ng.2770.html (request date 20.08.2016)

Bush WS, Moore JH. Chapter 11: Genome-Wide Association Studies // PLoS Computational Biology. 2012. Vol. 8(12):e1002822. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3531285/ (request date 09.07.2016)

Hindorff LA, Sethupathy P, Junkins HA. [et al.] Potential etiologic and functional implications of genome-wide association loci for human diseases and traits // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2009. Vol. 106(23). P. 9362-9367. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2687147/ (request date 06.08.2016)

The International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium [et al.] Risk alleles for multiple sclerosis identified by a genomewide study // The New England journal of medicine. 2007. Vol. 357. N 9. P. 851-862. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa073493 (request date 10.07.2016)

The International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium (IMSGC), Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 2 (WTCCC2), Sawcer S. [et al.] Genetic risk and a primary role for cell-mediated immune mechanisms in multiple sclerosis // Nature. 2011. Vol. 476(7359). P. 214-219. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182531/ (request date 14.09.2016)

Housley WJ, Fernandez SD, Vera K. [et al.] Genetic variants associated with autoimmunity drive NFκB signaling and responses to inflammatory stimuli // Science translational medicine. 2015. Vol. 7(291):291ra93. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4574294/ (request date 12.09.2016)

Achiron A, Gurevich M, Friedman N. [et al.] Blood transcriptional signatures of multiple sclerosis: Unique gene expression of disease activity // Ann Neurol. 2004. Vol. 55. P. 410–417.

Bomprezzi R, Ringner M, Kim S. [et al.] Gene expression profile in multiple sclerosis patients and healthy controls: identifying pathways relevant to disease // Hum. Mol. Genet. 2003. Vol. 12. N 17. P. 2191-2199.

Tajouri L, Fernandez F, Griffiths LR. Gene Expression Studies in Multiple Sclerosis // Current Genomics. 2007. Vol. 8. N 3. P. 181–189.

Raphael I, Webb J, Stuve O. [et al.] Body fluid biomarkers in multiple sclerosis: how far we have come and how they could affect the clinic now and in the future // Expert Review of Clinical Immunology. 2015. Vol. 11, N 1. P. 69-91.

Oliveira BM, Coorssen JR, Martins-de-Souza D. 2DE: the Phoenix of Proteomics // Journal of Proteomics. 2014. Vol. 104. P. 140-150.

Farias AS, Pradella F, Schmitt A. [et al.] Ten years of proteomics in multiple sclerosis // Proteomics. 2014. Vol. 14. P. 467–480.

Bhargava P, Calabresi A. Metabolomics in multiple sclerosis // Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2016. Vol. 22. P. 451-460.

##submission.downloads##

Як цитувати

Kolyada, T., Zelenskaya, A., & Tupotilov, O. (2020). Current approaches for research of multiple sclerosis biomarkers. Анали Мечниковського Інституту, (4), 27–33. вилучено із https://journals.uran.ua/ami/article/view/191882

Номер

Розділ

Дослідні статті